An additional thing that is incredibly deceptive about this is that when
someone testifies before a legislative committee, typically it isn't a
"give and take," it's a monologue by the person testifying. The
committee is there to listen and let people have their say. The graphic
makes it look like, oh, goodness, the lawmakers were left speechless by
the perspicacity of this young child, whereas the reality of it was,
they weren't there to ask OR answer questions. (Moreover, even if they
were, one could hardly imagine that there would be lots of political
capital in arguing with a pre-teen. It's pretty easy to see why this,
almost certainly rhetorical, question would have been left alone.)

Misrepresenting a child's testimony. NOM is brazen and tacky, not to mention stupid. Did the organization think that no one would call it out on the lie?

6 comments:

So we should assume that NOM believes that children being raised in single-parent homes (gay or straight) should be placed in straight two-parent homes, right? Otherwise, we might come to the conclusion that they're nothing but lying, sleazy, bigoted hypocrites, that exploit children in order to demonize gay people. They wouldn't want the public to think that, would they?

Technically, unless she didn't say what they said she said or said it in a different context that they stripped away, they didn't misrepresent her testimony. They used a picture that was meant to tug at heartstrings.

I love how you jump in and fight the battles, but you need to fight the real ones and not create ones yourself. Otherwise, you've just done exactly what they did. And you're better than that.

JT, you are wrong. Her question was rhetorical, meaning it was not meant to be answered by the committee. But NOM made it seemed as if she directly asked this committe the question and they were unable to answer her - ie a SERIOUS misrepresentation of her testimony.

NOM sure strained hard on the stool to drop this floater out. Aside from what the blog itself says, I have two things to add.

1. NOM appears to imply with the image that heterosexual unions will be voided by the law, and that in every instance, the children will be seperated from one parent, both of which will be paired with same-sex partners.2. Is NOM trying to put the issue so off to the side of reality that we start thinking the Committee will decide on whether to give legal rights to gay men OR lesbians, but somehow not both?Ludicrous.

About Me

Alvin McEwen is 46-year-old African-American gay man who resides in Columbia, SC.
McEwen's blog, Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters, and writings have been mentioned by Americablog.com, Goodasyou.org, People for the American Way, PageOneQ.com, The Washington Post, Raw Story, The Advocate, Media Matters for America, Crooksandliars.com, Thinkprogress.org, Andrew Sullivan's Daily Dish, Melissa Harris-Perry, The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell, Newsweek, The Daily Beast, The Washington Blade, and Foxnews.com.
In addition, he is also a past contributor to Pam's House Blend,Justice For All, LGBTQ Nation, and Alternet.org. He is a present contributor to the Daily Kos and the Huffington Post,
He is the 2007 recipient of the Harriet Daniels Hancock Volunteer of the Year Award and the 2010 recipient of the Order of the Pink Palmetto from the SC Pride Movement as well as the 2009 recipient of the Audre Lorde/James Baldwin Civil Rights Activist Award from SC Black Pride. In addition, he is a three-time nominee of the Ed Madden Media Advocacy Award from SC Pride.